Capital Trying to pull a fast one on me, can they do this legally?

[Anonymous]

So I have a charged off credit card account with Capital One that was sold to Weber and Olcese collection lawyers once I started rebuilding my credit. Starts out that they serve me papers. So I called them and said great that you got in contact with me because I am ready to pay off this debt. We agree to in writing that the case will be pulled back from the courts and reach an agreement once again in writing that covers a dollar amount to settle the account. In the letter it states that once money is paid that it will be a full and final settlement. So I pay them the money and thinking that I will start to GW Cap One once they update the account on the CRA's. So I pull my reports yesterday from USAA and I see the EX and EQ have updated and now show the difference in the balance between the original owed amount and the settlement amount. Should I have taken this full and final settlement statement to mean anything other than reporting a $0 balance? That is what I was after anyway's. Basically I accomplished nothing with this settlement. Did they break any reporting laws or is their fancy wording screwing me over. Thanks in advance.

[pipeguy]

---

@Anonymous wrote:

So I have a charged off credit card account with Capital One that was sold to Weber and Olcese collection lawyers once I started rebuilding my credit. Starts out that they serve me papers. So I called them and said great that you got in contact with me because I am ready to pay off this debt. We agree to in writing that the case will be pulled back from the courts and reach an agreement once again in writing that covers a dollar amount to settle the account. In the letter it states that once money is paid that it will be a full and final settlement. So I pay them the money and thinking that I will start to GW Cap One once they update the account on the CRA's. So I pull my reports yesterday from USAA and I see the EX and EQ have updated and now show the difference in the balance between the original owed amount and the settlement amount. Should I have taken this full and final settlement statement to mean anything other than reporting a $0 balance? That is what I was after anyway's. Basically I accomplished nothing with this settlement. Did they break any reporting laws or is their fancy wording screwing me over. Thanks in advance.

---

I suspect there is a footnote that says "account settled for less than full amount". The note is irrelevant as the account is considered paid in full - you have a written letter stating that fact. If the amount "forgiven" is greater than $600 expect another "gift" in the form of a 1099-C where you are taxed on the forgiven debt.

[Anonymous]

Nothing says "account settled for less than full amount" and the "forgiven" amount was just under $300 dollars. I thought when going through underwriting for a mortgage or any loan for that matter the bad accounts need to show $0 balance? 

[RobertEG]

The facts of the post are a little confusing.  It is stated that the debt was sold to a debt collector.  If that is the case, then the OC would have been required to report a $0 balance when they sold the debt, and would have been entirely out of the picture.

Apparently, the OC did not sell the debt, but rather the debt collector was just their assigned collection agent?

In that event, acting as the legal agent of the OC, if they agreed that, upon payment, whatever the amount, that the debt would be satisfied in full, then both they and the OC are legally bound to that agreement.  Upon receipt of payment, the debt collector would have to close their collection and report $0 under collection.  Upon notification to the OC that they had accepted satisfaction of the debt, the OC was bound to then also report a $0 debt balance on their account and report a current status of Paid. 

Their is nothing fancy about their wording, stating that the debt was settled in full.  It is clear as a bell to me.

I would send them a direct dispute of the accuracy of their reporting.  If they verify that there is an outstanding debt remaining, they would be in breach of the agreed terms of your contract.

I would then sue them, both for breach of contract and failure to comply with their requirement under FCRA 623(a)(2)(A) to accurately update information reported to the CRA,

[drkaje]

It might be a good idea to call EQ and see how it reads on their screen. I've been finding some inaccuracies on the USAA EQ lately. Thought my file may have been split, called EQ directly, and was told it's not split but USAA may be pulling from a database that hasn't been updated. I have $70-80K more student loan debt on the FAKO from USAA.

It's entirely possible the account is reporting correctly on your actual credit report.

[mrordinary]

This is happening with me, right now. I haven't paid/settled yet....but if I do she said my reports would show the remaining balance owed?!

[RobertEG]

It is an abosulte contradiction to accept payment as satisfaction of a debt, and then assert remaining debt.

If the debt is satisfied, the credtior is required to update the current status to Paid, and debt balance to $0, regardless of the amount they accepted as satisfaction of the debt.  No discretion on their part.

However, the balance prior to payment may still remain in your credit file.  It would take more than a normal CR to view that information, but technically it is still in your file, and thus potentially viewable.  But it could NOT be reported as a remaining debt due if your settlement specified that payment satisfied the debt.

[scmami]

So Robert....the remaining balance would report (understandable) but would settling with CapOne stop this debt from affecting utilization? This is my major concern....My situation (detailed in a recent thread) is similar to the OP, but I haven't yet settled. I'm going to soon and mainly because it's killing my utilization.

[proudnavymom]

---

@Anonymous wrote:

So I have a charged off credit card account with Capital One that was sold to Weber and Olcese collection lawyers once I started rebuilding my credit. Starts out that they serve me papers. So I called them and said great that you got in contact with me because I am ready to pay off this debt. We agree to in writing that the case will be pulled back from the courts and reach an agreement once again in writing that covers a dollar amount to settle the account. In the letter it states that once money is paid that it will be a full and final settlement. So I pay them the money and thinking that I will start to GW Cap One once they update the account on the CRA's. So I pull my reports yesterday from USAA and I see the EX and EQ have updated and now show the difference in the balance between the original owed amount and the settlement amount. Should I have taken this full and final settlement statement to mean anything other than reporting a $0 balance? That is what I was after anyway's. Basically I accomplished nothing with this settlement. Did they break any reporting laws or is their fancy wording screwing me over. Thanks in advance.

---

Several months ago I settled accounts with Asset Acceptance and Afni.  The first reporting they made a couple of weeks after I paid the settlement, they updated the balance to what the balance was minus the payment that I made with no mention of settled for a lesser amount.  They then reported within a month from then with a 0 balance and one said paid, settled for a lesser amount and the other just said paid collection because I made an agreement with them that they would report it that way.  If you just paid the settlement, maybe they are going to report soon with the 0 balance, paid, settled for a lesser amount or however they are going to note it...just a thought...